All players start with one territ. 4 will be programmed starting positions with a max of one being given out. These will be the four corners. This way, in small games, players will have to fight across the board. In games larger than 4, 2 players will start close to each other..

Cool. I personally like Angels and Demons more and I think you should finish it. I haven't figured out the traps yet at a first glance so perhaps that could be more clear. Also, the cursive small font is very hard on the eyes.

koontz1973 wrote:The traps have been placed so as to allow players to move freely around the board never having to touch them. What they provide is a short cut but that comes with a price.

Let me get the territ numbers on today so we can discuss the placement better. But it might be wise to remove a couple, or even add a couple more. Give me a couple of hours to get that done.

I understand the trap technique. I like it. But I don't think you put what you meant in the legend when you said: "trap and one side only, fall to death, lose game." Losing the entire game on losing one of many traps?

koontz1973 wrote:The traps have been placed so as to allow players to move freely around the board never having to touch them. What they provide is a short cut but that comes with a price.

Let me get the territ numbers on today so we can discuss the placement better. But it might be wise to remove a couple, or even add a couple more. Give me a couple of hours to get that done.

I understand the trap technique. I like it. But I don't think you put what you meant in the legend when you said: "trap and one side only, fall to death, lose game." Losing the entire game on losing one of many traps?

Thats the thing, you do not need to use them.

Here is version 2 with the territ names and finished legend for now.

Click image to enlarge.

Things to think about and talk about.Placement of traps.Should traps be a losing condition as I wanted or made into killer neutrals. Less fun but easier to understand.Thinking of adding weapons to the game. Thoughts?

Swords +1 auto deployArrows ranged attacks including over walls

Any other ideas along this line.

Winning condition.This could be holding a certain amount of monsters Having the centre dead warriors (H7, H8, I7, I8) being made into a escape route. Hold that to win. If traps become killer neutrals, what about going down the middle ages route of lose your home territ, you die.

Lets leave neutral values for now but if you think mine are too high or low, let me know.

I like the Idea of the losing condition if you hold the trap and only one side, but if that turns out to be a problem then I could see the killer neutral idea working. I think the neutral should reset to a value that reflects the difficulty of getting through the trap, not sure what you would use there somewhere between 5 and 10 ?

Everything below assumes killer neutrals and win and loss conditions

If you go with the Win condition for the H7 to I8 monsters, along with killer neutral traps, I think that traps K7 and T8 should have larger neutrals on as they are a quick route to the centre from the middle starting positions.

How about having the Minotaur at the centre - to be killed to win - and replacing the minotaur squares you have now with the auto-deploy weapons.

I also think the middle ages route would work with the killer neutrals, The starting positions are one territory further away than in in the Middle Ages map, so it should work with the right neutral values.

One question - is the +3 for the monsters +3 for each territory or +3 for all four territories ?

Assuming it is +3 for each of the 4I am wondering if +3 for each of the 4 held would be too much if all 4 are taken and could also lead to the fight over control of them being too important for the survival of the 2 nearby starting positions.

Maybe there should be a barrier between C2 & C3 or C3/D3 & C2/D2 and the same for all the monsters near the start points - it would also move the starting points a couple more territories apart.

The middle starting points access to the centre monsters looks a bit unbalanced, for example, A10 would have to go through a trap and A 5 wouldn't. Maybe make D6 and M9 traps.

The 4 central starting locations are further away from the Dead Warriors, giving them a disadvantage. If the terts are to stay the same, then more neutral troops should be added between the corner starting positions and the Dead Warriors.

I like the losing conditions. Probably needs worded more clearly.

Could a win condition be added of 3/4 Dead Warriors and Medusa?

I think archers and swords are a good idea... Especially archers. Something long range would be good.

Thanks guys, this is what I am doing for the next update (to come over the weekend).

The central dead warriors are becoming another character which will be a win condition.The traps are being split into two different types. Killer neutrals and losing condition. Spears will become a long range attack.Swords will be a +1 auto deploy.

I could move J1 to K1 and E16 to D16. This would mean that, even though the distance between starting positions and dead warriors would still be different, it would still allow for some difference in GP style.

I do not think so for this one, but if it makes it through, a second level can be created with the extra positions. Always liked the way DoD L1 cried out or a second level. I see no reason to do it now just for the sake of something that might come about.

koontz1973 wrote:I do not think so for this one, but if it makes it through, a second level can be created with the extra positions. Always liked the way DoD L1 cried out or a second level. I see no reason to do it now just for the sake of something that might come about.

As cairnswk says though, maps are being made for this.

I was mostly joking. Maybe 97%. But, we do need some 12 player maps, so that lack will give us 12 player games!!

Been giving it some thought. The problem with lose sides/trap and lose the game idea it's going to ruin game continuity. As soon as someone gets a dead warrior bonus; the other player gets desperate. If he gets desperate and breaks through and he breaks the bonus then good. But then he has to have enough in the tank to defend and he often won't and then a ton of games are just going to abruptly end and it will be anti climatic. And even if he defends it, the entire game then just becomes about preserving the trap and not the other cool stuff on the map.

And then if you change it so that the trap doesn't lose the player the game, the term "trap" could be misleading. B/C a player could intentionally want to lose one end for a reset to get locked into taking a dead warrior bonus that much easier. Perhaps, rename them gauntlets and have them reset. I know it's not quite what you envisioned. But I think it may be more practical.

Gone are the losing condition traps. Now a normal killer neutral.Added weapons with a progressive bonus.Added food and drink tied to the weapons.Added Hades for a whopping bonus jump.

Click image to enlarge.

Discuss.Should the slave entrances be one way and have hades be the only kill spot. Like the south pole in Antarctica or go the Feudal route? Placement of swords and food terits. These are just the initial placements and will need to be moved. Neutral values. I like the one for normal but can change for any of the others.

nebsmith wrote:You have the traps as killer neutrals now.How about instead of that they give negative life points - as a trap would and maybe a decay on the trap as well. The reason to bombard yourself off a trap.

How does someone bombard themself? Also, the +3 for the dead warrior is for holding 4 terts. That bonus is fine.

Are you saying that having a trap or Medusa makes it so that you get 0 troops to deploy? That's an awful idea if so. Actually, I just re-read it and realize that's not what you mean. I think using the phrase 'Life Points' is getting confusing. I get what you're trying to do there, but it's not the common terminology.

I would give +1 troop for every food and 2 weapons I think.

As far as Antarctica vs Feudal... Either way is fine with me. How about both ways? The center can bombard AND you can attack them like Feudal.